Human Identifcation and Anthropometric Identifcation: Correlation between Concepts

Abstract

The article is devoted to the distinction between anthropometric identifcation and establishment of identity in the legal sense. The need for the distinction is due to the fact that for a long time (since the ‘50s of the 20th century) the terms ‘personal identifcation’ (establishment of identity) and ‘identifcation of a person’ were used as synonyms. However, this synonymy contradicts the content of the concepts of ‘person’s identity’ and ‘personal identifcation’. The issue of identity establishment does not relate to the problem solved by the anthropometric identifcation as well as by morphological identifcation, including based on fngerprints. The results of the identifcation can only be used in the conduct of operative investigation activities and investigative actions executed for the purpose of identity establishment. In legal terms, establishment of identity is a criminological problem. And the task of anthropometric identifcation is solved by conducting a forensic facial recognition when examining human images. It is therefore proposed to adhere to the distinction of these terms in courseware for issues relating to the use of person’s physical appearance characteristics in forensic inquiry, law enforcement practice in appointments of the forensic facial recognition and the use of their results in criminal and civil proceedings.